Mobile Phone News:

 

Get the latest news, reviews and info in the Mobile World

Subscribe to our Blog

Subscribe to RSS Stay up to date with all our posts and comments by subscribing now.

Yahoo Reader Add to Google Reader or Homepage Add to netvibes Subscribe in Bloglines

2008 Ofcom Report – does it REALLY say you should pay to receive calls on your mobile phone?

WinstonSmith Posted on: September 2nd, 2008
Posted by: WinstonSmith in Editorial Opinions

(Note: all views expressed are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect those of Mobileshop.com)

Ofcom consider mobile phone termination chargesThere’s been a bit of a furore brewing over the weekend, after the publishing of a report by Ofcom, the big body who oversee the mobile phones and general communications industries. And it’s been a big shouting match, because many people have jumped on the idea that Ofcom are saying people should pay to receive calls on their mobile phones.

Yes, you heard that right.

However, the big question is, is that actually what the report says, or are people jumping to conclusions? Are Ofcom genuinely suggesting that you should pay to be phoned by someone else?

We need to have our rational heads on, to see what the report actually says.

Ok, that’s a very long report. One-hundred and sixty-six pages of it, in fact, so I won’t subject you to it, here (lest this become the longest blog post in history), but I will give you the link to the report (be aware, it’s a pdf file), so you can check it out for yourselves (hint: read section 8). But, I’ll summarise the main points for you:

  1. The current regulations for the way mobile call charges are handled is due to end in 2011.
  2. The world of mobile phones is changing, and new thinking is needed.
  3. It’s getting harder to guarantee where calls will be originating from, or going to. (I dispute that; how many times do you ring someone other than family, to your mates down the pub?)
  4. The EU reckon the model that will give customers the most benefit is sharing the costs between the caller and the person receiving the call, just like in America.

And that last one is what people are picking up on, and saying that Ofcom are suggesting people should pay to receive calls. If that is true, is the model the EU are mulling over the best way for mobile phones to go? Will customers get more benefit from having to pay to receive calls they never wanted in the first place (and if you haven’t guessed my feelings on it, from that question, you’re not paying attention)? Ok, I may not be able to comment about the European model, as I don’t use mobile phones over there, but the American one I can discuss.

You see, in the good ol’ US of A, there’s a reason why the person being called has to pay. Mobile phones in America don’t have a specific mobile-only format of number, like we do, with the 07 at the start. American mobile numbers are made of an area code, and the number. Or, in other words, they look just like American landline numbers. So, if you make a phone call in the USA, you have no real way of knowing whether it’s a mobile phone or a landline, and thus, you should only pay a fixed rate, based on whether it’s a local or national call.

The other person, the one you’re ringing, pays to receive your call, then. Let’s just say, I’ve spoken to many good friends in America, and the words most associated with that system are “stupid” and “retarded” (their words, not mine).

So, anyway, paying to receive calls in the UK. Is it being pushed as the way forward? Well, Ofcom don’t explicitly say that, but they make it pretty plain they’re thinking about it. It would be a shame if it happened, because I can’t think of a better way to cripple and kill the mobile industry in this country.

And what about people who use a pay as you go mobile phone? What if you only keep your phone for emergencies, and you run out of credit? Well, best hope no-one wants to ring you, because, if we do move to similar model to America, you won’t be able to receive any calls if you don’t have credit, making your mobile phone useful only as doorstop and/or cudgel.

Put it this way… I love mobile phones. Not as much as Technical Markus, as he will tell you, but I can’t do without mine. But if I had to pay to receive calls, mine would get binned…

So, what do you do? Well, make your voice heard! Get onto the Ofcom site, since they’ve invited consultation, and make absolutely sure you say no to paying to receive calls. Make it abundantly clear how many people will bin their mobile if they do start doing it. Use your voice to show Ofcom how you feel.

And you’d best get yourself a new mobile phone deal, before these changes even get pushed!

2 Responses to “2008 Ofcom Report – does it REALLY say you should pay to receive calls on your mobile phone?”

  • TechnicalMarkus

    Right, update on this… Vodafone have rocked up to the debate, saying they think scrapping termination fees (which would not definitely, but almost certainly, make people pay to receive calls), is a very silly idea, and that THEIR customers don’t want it.

    Ok, sure, they’re probably saying that because they make a mint off termination charges as they are now, but still, I agree with Winnie on this one.

    People paying to receive calls = mobile industry down the lavvy…

  • Jed

    Sign up to the e-Petition to stop this!

    http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/ReceiveCalCharge/

Leave a Reply